« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Result of Iowa: They Didn’t Want Mitt in 2008;They Don’t Want Him Now

The results of the Iowa Caucuses are in.  To the extent that you can draw conclusions from the votes of 123,000 individuals, here are some quick observations.

1) The Media will invariably focus on which conservative candidates should drop out.  They will also focus on the fact that there is nobody who has a definitive roadmap to defeat Romney.  But the larger point they will overlook is how much the Republican electorate dislikes Romney.  He spent million of dollars in 2008 and got crushed by Huckabee.  He spent millions of dollars this year, yet he failed to improve on his 2008 showing (Santorum spent just $30,000 on ads).  The punchline is that 75% of GOP voters are willing to vote for anyone anyone against Romney.

2) It appears that Romney’s base of support is limited to rich secular voters.  That’s not exactly the appeal you want to have going into this election.  There is very little overlap between Romney’s 2008 voters and his current supporters.  In other words, he is last cycle’s McCain.

3) As we head into New Hampshire and South Carolina, I have a feeling that Romney will finally incur aggressive and sustained attacks from multiple candidates.  In particular, Newt is seeking his revenge – to the extent that he wants Romney to lose more than he wants to win himself.

4) With 27% of the electorate being Independent voters, and Ron Paul garnering support of almost half those voters, can we finally end this nonsense of having non-Republicans vote in a Republican primary/caucus?

5) With the prospects of electing a conservative president becoming dimmer by the day, we really need to divert some of our attention to the congressional races.  In a presidential election year, all of the primaries are much earlier, including those for Senate and House candidates.  We need to mobilize for conservatives down the ticket.  Our Republican president will need a strong conservative Congress to prevent a rehash of the 2001-2006 era of compassionate conservatism.

6) The most important observation from Iowa?  Republicans are dramatically underwhelmed by the current field.  In a year when Republicans are fired up to defeat Obama, they barley broke the 2008 turnout record, and when the increase in Independent voters is factored in, there were probably less Republican voters this time around.  Unlike previous elections, there is a huge opportunity for a conservative candidate to enter the race and sweep the field.  Unless someone else gets in, Gingrich appears to be the only one who still has a decent level of national support to drag Romney into a protracted primary battle.

7) On a personal level, I’ve always said that I would support the anti-Romney whomever that would be (except for Paul), just as I would support any Republicans nominee against Obama in the general election.  For now, with Perry headed back to Texas and Santorum with little support outside of Iowa, it appears that Newt is the only hope for those who proudly declare: Mittens Delenda Est.  McCain’s impending endorsement of Romney will only galvanize us to kill (politically, of course) two Republican imposters with one stone.

COMMENTS

  • marktx

    Gingrich and Huntsman are viable alternatives. And Huntsman has the financial resources to be the last man standing as the anti-Romney.

    • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

      …after all the “You’re a liar” talk from The Newt, he’s going to survive to mount a “positive” campaign?

      [and]

      …after all the “Iowans only grow corn” dissing by Huntsman, he’s going to transmute from elitism to populism?

      • clowngirl

        He said Romney was inauthentic – pretending to be somebody he wasn’t. That’s what almost everyone thinks about Romney.

        It’s kinda like the moment when Newt said “the only reason you didn’t become a career politician is because you lost to Ted Kennedy.”

        FINALLY somebody said it.

        And Romney is a liar – heck, he even lied about his own name.

        What’s interesting is how little attention the media paid to the millions of dollars in attack ads against Newt – some of which were revealed to be outright lies- and how much negative attention they are giving to Newt for “going negative” for saying plainly what everybody knows.

    • redcal

      The financial resources couldn’t even get him to 1% of the vote tonight. I liked the guy, too, but it seems clear that his campaign is over.

      • marktx

        In fact, he ignored Iowa.

        Just about every candildate has been at the top of the polls during the last four months as the anti-Romney. Now it is Santorum’s turn. In the next few days and weeks Santorum will drop in the polls, leaving Huntsman as the only candidate to not yet get an anti-Romney bounce. But Huntsman could very well be the last guy standing after Florida to take on Romney.

        Who says we have to go with Romney after only four states have voted ?

        • flgal208

          and then fall, but batter ROmney first, which is why Perry would be stupid to drop out after one state that doesn’t even give delegates!! SC is still wide open

        • hweila

          And there’s no room left for Huntsman. The notion of a single not-Romney broke down weeks ago and we now have 4 candidates each with appeal to a very specific part of the Republican electorate. Romney for the moderates, Gingrich still commands the most support among the economic issue dominated portion of the Tea Party, Santorum for the social conservatives and Paul for the libertarians. Unless one of those candidates can break out past their present appeal, we’re likely headed to a brokered convention, as thanks to all the date hopping a sizable majority of Republican contests this year will allocating their delegates proportionally rather than as winner take all.

          There’s just no constituency left for Huntsman. Huntsman has made essentially the same mistake as Guiliani did last time: You can afford to lose Iowa, but you can’t afford to IGNORE it. Huntsman has spent all of his time in New Hampshire and has never been able to get above third/fourth place, and with a Perry withdrawal and even a few point momentum bump for Santorum, there’s an excellent chance he drops all the way to 5th place.

          To have any chance of placing a solid 2nd in New Hampshire, we’d need to start seeing a major break towards Huntsman in the next few days. But because he ignored the Iowa caucuses, he’s going to be spending at least the next few days in media limbo as the only stories will be Santorum’s win, Romney’s lead in the polls in NH, and covering the candidates who drop out.

      • dpmapper

        In retrospect, he probably should have, but that’s another story.

        • don12345

          Romney won Iowa without trying and you guys think people don’t want Romney?? how silly..

          • redcal

            You travel in different circles from me, don12345.

          • don12345

            Perry was the only real opponent to Mitt. Perry was a better candidate on paper than Mitt. It will be sad to see him go. I don’t think Perry should drop out. If Perry stays in to win second place then he has a real shot in 8 years.

          • Benta_Nordstrom

            Iowa is only the beginning of the race!! Governor Perry should wait until the rest of the country starts voting. Santorum is good but he may only win Iowa like Huckabee did in 2008!! Conservative voters are not going to vote for Romney or Ron Paul!

          • http://www.timothy-bladel.com/ center77

            and you are saying that he put nothing in. I find that ot be very funny.

          • antisesquipedalion

            mitt weeny is now 5 for 23 . he’s batting 0.217. time to send him down to the minors. ? maybe 2016, we’ll get back to you on that

          • clowngirl

            Romney spent tons of time in Iowa in 2008 – has continually visited since, had a son going out as a surrogate visit all 99 counties, and spent the second highest amount of money on ads ( between him and his Super PAC)

            It’s ridiculous to say he “wasn’t trying”

    • lizzie

      and it is difficult to see a change in the dynamics unless Romeny gets knocked in New Hampshire. He will still win, but if Gingrich and Huntsman can knock Romney down to below 35%, who knows.

      I am still digesting Gov. Perry’s speech, and his decision to go back to texas instead of keeping his commitments in South Carolina on Wednesday afternoon.

      One thing is for sure, no one else will ever jump into this contest or any future contest with only four months before Iowa, or someone with a responsible fulltime job.

      It really is up to Gingrich and Huntsman, but Huntsman does not have the financial resources – he is not rich like Romney in his own right,although Huntsman’s father is. I am the stereotype Huntsman voter, and, although I think he is very smart, he is also off-key too many times.

      “Never Quit” is the motto for Marcus Luttrell’s Lone Survivor Foundation.

      I find it so very hard to believe that Rick Perry is going to quit before South Carolina.

      I guess it will deend on how many people try to convince him to jump back in on Thursday, with his schedule. And that last Youtube he came out with today – he should have been running that for the last two weeks.

      Iowa is how America got Barack Obama ,and Jimmy Carter.
      Thanks, sarcasm intended. I still can not believe they think Santorum can 1) stop Romney, or 2) be electable.

      Beware of Ron Paul – he can now claim HE is electable because he got all those independents.

      No wonder Iran and Egypt are emboldened. believe me, they really do not understand American politics, and probably think they will now get a new President even weaker than Obama.

      The financial markets are going to be unstable for the next month. Just what America needs, a new drop in confidence just when people had recovered from the debt ceiling fiasco. The real estate market actually froze for four months. I lost three buyers overnight.

      Santorum or Romney is Obama’s dream come true. Either the DNC makes the election all about abortion, or all about prvate equity soulless job-killers.

      • flgal208

        just going home—maybe he just wants to sleep in his bead and play with his dog before gearing up for round two (or mile two)…he said he was in a marathon…maybe he’s just getting a poweraid :) …seriously, I can’t believe his campaign people aren’t telling him that he didn’t really lose anything–IA is wrong, again and send him to SC

        • lizzie

          and a LOT more for Thursday and Friday.

          I figure he can take Wednesday off to re-assess, but just read center77′s comment that no announcement until Thursday.

          As I wrote in the earlier thread – I hope he decides to keep most of those SC commitments, go to NH for the debates, and make a powerful foreign policy speech – the timing is really good for that, and all he has to do is make it on Monday in New Hampshire, and he will get media coverage.

          Overdue on distinguishing his foreign policy from Romney’s embrace of Bush43 neocon-ism,and Ron Paul’s ‘circa 1798 to the left of Obama’ and Huntsman’s focus on East Asia.

          A Hamiltonian/Jacksonian view, that goes beyond Iran and the Western Hemisphere.

        • lizzie

          and a LOT more for Thursday and Friday.

          I figure he can take Wednesday off to re-assess, but just read center77′s comment that no announcement until Thursday.

          As I wrote in the earlier thread – I hope he decides to keep most of those SC commitments, go to NH for the debates, and make a powerful foreign policy speech – the timing is really good for that, and all he has to do is make it on Monday in New Hampshire, and he will get media coverage.

          Overdue on distinguishing his foreign policy from Romney’s embrace of Bush43 neocon-ism,and Ron Paul’s ‘circa 1798 to the left of Obama’ and Huntsman’s focus on East Asia.

          A Hamiltonian/Jacksonian view, that goes beyond Iran and the Western Hemisphere.

          • lizzie

            which is also about our economy and jobs.

            Andrew Jackson’ foreign policy built on Hamilton, but also was about avoiding foreign entanglements unless anyone messed with the USA, and then smash them to dust.

            Neocons tend to still think in Wilsonian terms – spreading democracy.

            I forget the fourth strain of US foreign policy. Walter Russell Mead wrote about it at his blog. (he is a professor without an advanced degree – just a very original thinker)

          • mccoypauley

            Not a free trader… He was for protectionism, tariffs and taxes.

          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

            He was a smuggler in business. His tariffs weren’t about hoarding gold. They were about protecting American industry from European competition.

            Same (wrong) policy, different purpose.

        • don12345

          Gingrich is the reason Perry is considering dropping out. The South is Gingrich’s stronghold.

      • mccoypauley

        Except in Iowa with Evangelicals.

        I don’t understand why Conservatives don’t place the blame for the Santorum results where they belong.

        On Bob Van Der Plaats and his legion of loonies.

        • don12345

          Didn’t you hear how Bob was asking for a million to endorse a candidate. I guess Santorum was desperate enough to buy an election.

          • treeofliberty

            and yes that’s a big IF, I’m glad Santorum lost tonight by a few votes.

          • http://www.timothy-bladel.com/ center77

            but who knows.

          • jakeofalltrades

            but alarm bells are ringing that I shouldn’t.

  • justonevoice

    I think Santorum gave an excellent victory speech tonight. If anyone was watching (a big if), that was Santorum’s best speech of the campaign. I think Huntsman deserves a second look and is running a far more conservative campaign than the media paints him. I think Sarah Palin was write on the money tonight when she said the GOP should not marginalize Ron Paul supporters. I’m hoping for a Huntsman surge — he’s the only one who hasn’t!

    • marktx

      His record in Utah was pretty good. And his economic plan to restore America is one of the better plans I’ve seen. But most importantly, Hunstman has the personal fortune to stay in the race long after all the other anti- Romney candidates have dropped out.

      While Hunstman has yet to show much traction in the polls, nor did Santorum up until about two weeks ago.

    • nuclear139

      The former governor of Utah skipped Iowa which was a big mistake and now he has no momentum to carry New Hampshire a must win state. Huntsman is finished!

      • vaaztx

        all of his eggs in a New Hampshire basket, just like McCain. He’s hoping to place well enough there to get to Florida, just like McCain, where he won’t be able to compete because he has no money.

      • marktx

        LOL

        • elayman

          He is only ‘over’ if we give up. Let’s all contribute to continue the surge !

          http://jon2012.com/tv-ad-fund

          The “Air This Ad” contest is halfway to our goal! You can double your donation and our impact in New Hampshire right now! I will match all donations until midnight Wednesday http://j.mp/uozpHp. Your support and donation will do great things for us here in New Hampshire.

          • federalfarmer1

            I wish I trusted huntsmans instincts to be conservative on non fiscal matters. The fact weaver is part of his campaign makes it hard to ghettos excited about him. And the whole supportig Obama thing.

          • elayman

            Huntsman has his problems, but IMO they are extremely minor compared to the other candidates and their baggage and flat out unelectabiilty among conservatives.

      • flgal208

        he doesn’t need momentum in NH, just a ton of money to beat Romney senseless and send him into SC on crutches and that is why Perry needs to stay—NO ONE will be in first when they get there, it will be a pretty even playing field and if Perry still has money in the bank, he has a better chance than most to win…Huntsman won’t have a shot, but might in FL, but his creepiness is a factor amongst us women as I’ve yet come across any that like him—I’m sure there are some, I just haven’t met them…

    • Adjoran

      to Obama and Clinton, and then wash your eyes if you gave him a second look.

  • becky5

    Just when I thought it was impossible to detest McCain anymore than I already did.

    http://www.politico.com/blogs/burns-haberman/2012/01/mccain-to-endorse-romney-tomorrow-109514.html

  • redcal

    Santorum and Paul are simply not set up to go beyond the first few contests. The only credible alternatives were Gingrich or Perry, and without a top-tier finish by either, Mittens is smilin’ wide tonight.

    If you think otherwise, go bet on Intrade and make 400% on your money. Romney’s at ~85% to win the nomination.

    • marktx

      Whether we like him or not, RP runs the type of campaign that will allow him to stay in the race all the way til the end. And RP has enough financial resources as well.

      Whereas Santorum is short on money and organization. the only credible candidates that have a chance to stop Romney are Gingrich and Huntsman.

      • redcal

        But not to win, just to get his message out. I’m glad he’s around, but he also has no chance to win the nomination, at least for the GOP. He has the narrowest distance between his (extremely loyal) floor and his ceiling of any of the candidates.

      • vaaztx

        That tomorrow morning Rick Santorum will wake up with a LOT more cash than he had this morning.

        • marktx

          ….that Santorum has yet to be fully vetted by the media. Nor have his opponents spent much money running negative ads against him.

          In my opinion, Santorum was never a serious candidate.

          • redcal

            And the media attention will get to him, I agree. But at least there’s some real, solid data for the media to start asking the questions about Mittens that everyone else has been asking for a while now. Being the perpetual bridesmaid in polls is one thing — losing the first real race is something else, especially after his Iowa push the last couple of weeks.

    • ghostship

      To many Romney supporters think that anger at Obama will get the 75% of the base who can’t stand Romney to hold their noses and vote for him in the general. Romney supports clearly don’t understand that anger quickly turns into apathy when presented with two unappetizing choices.

      Romney can’t win the general. Any other candidate has a better shot at beating Obama in the general and yes that includes Ron Paul.

      Four more years of Obama isn’t something to gloat over.

      • gabs

        What is the basis for the statement “Romney can?t win the general. Any other candidate has a better shot at beating Obama in the general and yes that includes Ron Paul.”

  • http://electionsanalysis.blog.com paint_it_red

    There are 4-5 tickets out of Iowa. I’m sorry, but Iowa is not so important by itself that it should get to narrow the field from 7 to only 4 or 5. That’s too much, too early.

    • flgal208

      no delegates was lost—money was lost, but somewhere people made money from it and had a job, so Perry was creating more jobs :) …He needs to get a kick-butt massage, take a drink of whiskey, call up his moneymen and then put on his boots and kick some Texas butt in SC/FL because there is no way any one has those states sewn up and Newt Santorum are poser conservatives….AND Glenn Beck came out just today and praised the heck out of Perry—that’s something.

      • Adjoran

        It’s certainly fair to call Iowa a farce and a sham, but not AFTER you compete and lose.

        In hindsight, Perry’s candidacy was doomed by his late entry and the back surgery. Running for President involves much more than just the issues you know and care most about, there is a learning curve, also about the opponents and how to deal with them (since you will need them later if you win), and coordinating a wide array of logistics like a general – planning to qualify for ballots and setting up state and local organizations, for instance. It’s hard to get up to speed when the game is starting, preparation is the mother of success.

        And back surgery is no walk in the park most of the time. There can be an extended recovery period, there is no way to tell until you’ve already had it. Often the choice will be between pain and painkillers, and either is a huge distraction from an activity which requires full attention.

        The ridiculous hype which preceded his late entry didn’t help, either, as it set him up as some Reaganesque conservative hero, which was impossible to deliver. But the advance publicity made his every slip seem worse, magnified every hesitation.

  • bdirks

    He wasn’t rejected by 75% of the GOP. A third of that 75% were Ron Paul supporters. Scratch them off the list of relevant people. Cant wait for him to score 50+ in NH so this tired line about how shocking it is for Romney to have only held a steady fourth (but the lead) of the vote in, what as until tonight, a field of 7 or more plausible candidates, can be finally dismissed.

    • redcal

      ..among registered GOP voters. Mittens is at 24.8% as of tonight, nationally. So yes, literally, explicitly, he’s being rejected by 75% of the GOP.

      http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/republican_presidential_nomination-1452.html

      • bdirks

        What’s the “rate of rejection” on everyone else in that poll?

        • redcal

          Look, I think Romney has the nomination sewn up. But this house is divided as it’s never been in my lifetime.

          And the other candidates who spiked (Cain, Perry, Gingrich) all exceeded 25% across multiple polls, whereas Mittens has been unable to — after running for president for 6 years, having the highest name recognition, the most financial resources, etc, etc.

          • Adjoran

            And how did they get all these Republican voters to put him at the top of the list? Magic? Mind control?

            If this supposed “establishment” is so powerful, why aren’t they ever able to do anything? Yet despite this total incompetence be able to thwart “true conservatives” at every turn?

      • nuclear139

        If and when Mitt wins the nomination he will be on a extremely short leash with conservatives and he may not count on some of their support in November when it will matter most. Why? Because Mitt is no conservative and the only reason to vote for him is that he is not the president which is the worst way to get voters support. Running on a platform that he is no Obama while not giving conservatives, independents and undecided voters any other reason to elect him is a recipe for disaster and says Romney has huge problems.

        • redcal

          He’s going to wreck downballot races in 2012. The turnout tonight was atrocious given the environment. The anti-Obama feeling this year is comparable to the anti-Bush feeling in 2008, yet Hillary+Obama drew 240k voters that year, and we only got ~120K this year. WTF.

    • vaaztx

      If 73% of his voters were Republicans and half of the Independents that voted for him were Conservative or Conservative-leaning then he still places a strong third. Rejecting him and his supporters will push him to a third party run which will guarantee Obama re-election.

      • mccoypauley

        for how to beat Obama.

      • http://electionsanalysis.blog.com paint_it_red

        Ron Paul may be crazy. Brilliant points mixed with crazy. But like it or not, he is way too important to ignore. Put him in charge of the Fed or something to get him and his on board, or we lose.

  • goodgovernance

    He’s the only candidate who hasn’t had one yet. He deserves more than just a second look, he deserves our support.

    Wouldn’t you feel better with a President Huntsman than a failed nominee Romney?

    • marktx

      Huntsman has a solid record on pro-life issues, and is a fiscal conservative. In addition, Huntsman is an expert on foreign policy issues. He will get a window of opportunity during the next week or two, the question is whether he can benefit from it.

    • natedogg

      I think Republicans would be smart to look at Huntsman. He’s the only candidate that we Democrats are genuinely afraid of.

      • redcal

        If it had been a two man race all along, I have no doubt that Huntsman would take the nomination over Romney.

      • marktx

        When I first heard some democrats say what you just stated, I thought they were full of it. But after getting a closer look at Huntsman’s real record, as well as his plans for the future, the guy would make a formidable candidate against Obama. Huntsman is a conservative, yet has a personality that doesn’t offend independent voters. Whether he can gain traction in the next week or two, we shall soon see.

        • pttx333

          a self-described Dem who comes to this conservative site – especially regarding who “they” fear the most? You might want to do some research and soul searching on this one. Just a suggestion – but that is what I would do.

        • natedogg

          ,,,and this is a message to all Republicans: Huntsman is NOT part of the growing anti-intellectual wing of the Republican party. We respect his intellect, his appreciation of science and diplomacy. He’s exudes qualifications. The man speaks Mandarin for crying out loud! I really can’t say that about many other figures that have serious pull within the conservative movement today, especially post-Palin. Something to keep in mind as you guys pick candidates and leaders in the future.

      • lizzie

        but he if off-putting, bad jokes, and way too focussed on East Asia.

        I have studied Af-Pak for eight years. in depth, short of learning Pashto.
        Huntsman is naive about Afghanistan, and never mentions any other part of the world.

        He lost me, so I have no idea why the Democrats are afraid of him.

        altho I would definitely vote for Huntsman as a protest vote. Just do not think he inspires confidence and leadership.

        of course, I keep thinking Evan Bayh will suddenly replace Obama…

        • pttx333

          Huntsman is just too … something … can’t think of a way to describe it other than what you said, off-putting. He’s sorta like the dweeb that is in every middle school and high school everywhere – the one who is such a dork but thinks he is God’s gift to the world. And everything he says repulses people – sorta like if he had spinach stuck in his teeth.

          Agree with his fiscal side, but the rest – not so much. I’ve never known of him to focus on anything foreign other than China. That is fine, but certainly not enough to lead us through this horrible mess we’re in.

          Bottom line, though, I can’t see Huntsman successfully repairing the incredible damage throughout the world that has been perpetrated by b.o. and his minions.

          On the other hand, what do I know? ;-)

          • lizzie

            failed, and he had to close down the big Orlando HQ and retreat to New Hampshire. He also thought he would raise a lot of money from disillusioned dems and independents. oops.

            His anger comes through, with the elitist condescension.

            I think the Huntsman daughters should win :)

            .When James Carville went into a rant on CNN about Perry having the ‘worst campaign in presidential history’, I wanted to smack him thru my tv.
            Besides Huntsman, was there not someone who spent $50 million and got three delegates?

            really have to sign off – have to drive to NH tomorrow, and then back to the Bronx to figure out how to get rid of an apt I am not allowed to rent and can not sell, even tho it is cheapest neighborhood in the whole city and actually a nice affordable neighborhood. last stop on the subway and no Starbucks.

          • pttx333

            to Huntsman and Romney – and to a degree with Santorum and Newt. But particularly with the former two. They’ve never lived in the real world and haven’t a clue as to how it works. I’m not knocking their wealth – good for them – but with wealth comes a lot of responsibility. IMHO, both of them have bungled it.

            Oh, that Carville (a/k/a The Lizard) is a loon. For the life of me, I cannot see how Mary Matalin lives with him. The only good thing I’ve heard him say was when he called Romney a serial windsock. That tickled my funny bone, and I use it a lot. Perfect description.

            I just got up this a.m. and saw the great news that Perry is still in. I KNEW it – he is not a quitter! Hallelujah!

            Quick question: why do you have an apt that you are not allowed to rent and cannot sell? Tied up in an estate? Boy, what a holy bummer.

  • septembergurl

    I like it!

    Iowa, the first state to actually vote (no matter how attenuated the voting is) shows what we know to be true. No one wants to vote for Romney. We don’t like him, we don’t want him!

    He polled worse than in 2008 and seems to be losing to a candidate who spent $30,000 on the campaign.

    Now we have 2 debates in NH — one of them Sat 9 PM and one — I am not kiddng — Sunday MORNING at 9 AM. Should be interesting. If you are anti-Romney we still have Santorum, Gingrich,Huntsman, Paul, maybe Bachmann as well.

    • septembergurl

      Looks like Santorum has won, with 99.5 % of vote in he leads mittens by 1/10 of 1%.

      Sweet.

      • redcal

        I’m happy that he’ll get to tweak Mittbot for the next week before NH.

        • treeofliberty

          And I’m sure he;s mighty glad Santorum is going to be getting more money, and attention and that Bachmann appears to be staying in the race and that the Newt is getting angry …the more the merrier as far as Mittens is concerned!

          From a purely political point of view, you gotta admire the strategy o f the Romney campaign: playing down Iowa expectation till the last minute, dividing and conquering brilliantly …of course it helps when you have gaffe-prone opponents but smart strategy nonetheless

          • jakeofalltrades

            n/irrelevance

          • jakeofalltrades

             

  • inovrmihd

    Dan, you say that we should focus on congressional races. Waht is the point as long as Boehner and his ilk are in charge?

  • sunshinek67

    One more time: Mitt ’12 did less well than Mitt ’08. Santorum ’12 did far less well than Huckabee ’08. Conclusion: Iowa poopy pants dumb.

  • http://www.theprecinctproject.wordpress.com ColdWarrior

    Good question, and that fix needs to be made. It will only happen if, and when, more conservatives get “inside” the Party as precinct committeeman eligible to vote for the Party officers, who make these decisions.

    The Republican Party will become “more conservative” when more conservatives get inside the Party machinery.

    Thank you.

    ColdWarrior

  • flgal208

    today, so how does winning or losing IA mean much AND it’s a blue (not purple) state? Why does it look Perry is dropping out? This week, FNC or another candidate will vet Santorum and down he will plummet. AND everybody in NH will pummel Romney, so SC is still a wide open field. Why doesn’t Perry just concentrate on SC & FL where he has a real chance (and delegates to get) AND then decide? OR is he just making a stop in TX to recharge his batteries?

    IF he drops out, then my support goes to Huntsman, the other GOV with a record of being fiscally sound…I still think he’s creepy, but he’s not a flip-flopper who’d sell his soul for a vote ROmney and he’s not all over the map, has been Newt who has no leadership skills and has said in his book that he’s not a good leader.

    I pray that Perry stays in the race because IA is NOT indicative of this country, far from it…I mean come on, Paul got 21% of the vote!

    • Danielle Davis (ocleverone)

      I think of Iowa as more of an early gauge of the candidates.

  • http://www.timothy-bladel.com/ center77

    on it and decide what to do, and if you really think about it, what else would we want him to do. I think that this is an honest way to go forward, and as a Perry supporter I expect nothing less.

    Here are the three things I think could happen.

    Perry could decide that it is over and stop, but with being so close to Newt in vote count, and a path still there, he may stay in and really shake up his campaign.

    Perry could really shake up his campaign and call it a new push, which would not be that bad of a plan. Like I just said he was not that far behind Newt in the vote count, so all those who say Perry needs to step down should say the same about Newt.

    Perry could just wait to see what happens in S.C., and then go on from there. If Romney causes some of the other candidates to drop out by sweeping them in N.H. then it may make S.C. a lot better for Perry.

    Perry has already paid for air time in S.C. and he may just want to give this an honest prayer to see what he thinks would be the best thing to do.

    All I am saying, before we give up hope, let?s wait until we see what is going to happen. We have to take Perry at his word and think he is going to pray and think about it.

    It?s not over yet, no matter how much some of the people on here want it to be. This is not a done deal.

    • Kayla

      Just like Herman Cain is.

  • pttx333

    cc

    • jakeofalltrades

      I need Santorum to metaphorically die.

      • jakeofalltrades

        Up is down, white is black, cats are chasing dogs.

        Heaven help us all.

  • usedtobelib

    Ronald Reagan either.

  • thosjefferson

    Newt’s entire life has been a series of dramatic policy initiatives, bombastic claims about his own intelligence, infidelity to his wives, and a short-fused temper that takes everything personally. He never changes his mind (right); instead, he labels his policy reversals as correcting his “mistakes.” And yet Horowitz is still pushing him!

    Now, typically and predictably, Newt’s got revenge on his mind and he’s intent on destroying Romney even though he knows he’s lost the nomination. He’s already cutting Obama campaign ads (calling Romney a “liar” on national TV with no specifics). He’s going to save the DNC millions by creating anti-Romney ads that even Obama might have enough class not to run.

    Newt is doing exactly the opposite of what Reagan would do. Any so-called conservative or Republican who supports Newt should be ashamed.

    • JSobieski

      If Newt attackes Romney from the right, Obama can’t make use of the ads.

      • lineholder

        in the Union Leader tomorrow. It’s good. He does attack from the right and draws very clear contrast.

    • lakeshore

      To borrow from Will Rogers: I am not a member of any organized political party: I am a Republican. It’s happened again. Too many “conservatives” competing has allowed the establishment moderate to get the lead again, shades of 2008. I’m as conservative as anyone, and wish that Perry had done well enough the last few months to take the mantle from Romney. Perhaps he still has a chance to. But, if it isn’t Perry, none of the others who are running now can do it. Period. People, stop trying to make Newt into the hero (or even “conservative”) he never was. He was always a self serving career politician of the worst ilk. His baggage will turn off independents as it already has with most on the right who know him. It’s time to either coalesce around Perry, or let Romney beat Obama, which he CAN. I’m so tired of the defeatists. We don’t always get Mr. Perfect. So…let Romney’s team be resourceful, they can tailor their ads to beat BHO. Try to see the race as independents see it, not as we do.

      • JSobieski

        I argue with independents quite a bit. I disagree that Romney will be such a strong candidate or that Newt would be so weak.

        Nor do I think Huntsman is out, and he would be better than Romney.

        In terms of beating Obama, Huntsman is probably the best candidate . . . at least on paper.

        • jakeofalltrades

          compared to Romney. I think Huntsman would be better than Romney but not in a general election where he’ll probably casually insult every last voter in some significant way.

          • pttx333

            person to me. Like the dork who thinks he is the coolest thing since sliced bread. YUK!

  • http://www.timothy-bladel.com/ center77

    and I am fuming over how the Perry haters have been treating supporters of Perry tonight. Talk records, talking about wins and losses, but do not try to make people feel worse than they already do.

    And for the Perry supporters, it is not over yet, and I have faith Perry will fight on.

    He will change his team big time, and we will see a bigger fight from him.

    • pttx333

      ,

    • JSobieski

      nt

    • http://www.changeforrickperry.org louisianapatriette

      Ronald Reagan changed out his staff in 1980 as well. Not an uncommon occurrence and it might work wonders for the Perry Campaign. I’m keeping the faith and waiting for orders from Perry. He’s not one to quit and I’m sure he’ll be back on the trail before long.

  • usedtobelib

    to the absolute center. It may already be there–DEAD CENTER.

    Romney haters–it seems you have forgotten that the American public thought that Barack Obama, an unknown to them, was CENTER or at most, CENTER Left. Yeah, I know, how could they have been so dumb, but that’s another story for another thread.

    Obama faced an old man with no executive skill, a point driven home when that nominee suspended his campaign because of the financial collapse, went to DC, and in a high public meeting, HAD ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO SAY, ABOSULUTELY NOTHING TO CONTRIBUTE.

    He compounded his problems by showing what little attention he gave to the importance of the Presidency by nominating as his VP choice a person who, though effective in her small state as governor, had absolutely no experience on the national stage, but most importantly had no knowledge of anything of national significance beyond the borders of her state, a woman who couldn’t have told her children why or how there came to be a North and South Korea. The public’s faith in the old man, if they ever had any, was shot.

    Your assumption that John McCain lost the Presidency because he wasn’t a conservative is simply wrong. Americans hate anything they view as ideological rigidity.

    They didn’t see McCain or Obama as ideologically rigid. They saw McCain as old and inept and Obama as young, vigorous, and in the center.

    They were right about McCain. He is old and inept. They were wrong about Obama. He is rigid and his youth and vigor (if there even exists any vigor) have been misspent.

    Bottom line: Americans want someone not too left or right and they want someone who has common sense and a knowledge of what makes jobs.

    • goodgovernance

      Any chance four years ago you argued Romney was a “true conservative,” and that McCain’s supposed greater appeal with folks in the center was irrelevant? Because most diehard Romney supporters back then sure did!

      I knew Romney was a phoney, though, so I couldn’t support him. Once people in the center know Romney’s a phoney too (and that he didn’t create jobs in the private sector, and more importantly, didn’t do it in the public sector) they won’t vote for him in the general election, either.

      • usedtobelib

        No, I never argued Romney or Rudy were “true conservatives.”

        The “true conservative” is a meaningless term, always changing.

        For instance, do you really think Ronald Reagan, were he alive today and running for governor of California, would take a strong position against gay marriage? Would he work actively to take it down? Nope. Given a strong opponent, he’d fudge his attitude toward it, give a lip service “No” to it, then promptly avoid the topic when he could.

        Reagan was no “true conservative” in lots of ways. Gonna call him a “phoney”?

  • mccoypauley

    I cannot understand why you wouldn’t want to involve independents, who have to register Republican to participate.

    • http://moelane.com/ Moe Lane

      Stop doing so, and don’t make the mistake of pretending that you don’t understand exactly what I mean.

      • mccoypauley

        And I don’t understand cryptic hints.

        If you’re saying that my comments are unwanted, just come out and be explicit. I’m not here to abuse anyone’s hospitality, although I do find your definition of hospitality pretty narrow.

        And to think, I gave you a genuine and pretty nice compliment earlier today. Sheesh!

        • http://www.doctor-bob.biz rsklaroff

          …because he would hope that you could appreciate the fact that allowing D’s/Indies to vote in Iowa diluted the results…and has NOTHING to do with inviting them to become Republicans in the fall.

  • usedtobelib

    in third place.

    He won.

    • goodgovernance

      And then look where he wound up.

      If Romney won, Santorum won more. Not that it’ll help Santorum in the long run.

      Still, I think this may be just the thing to finally galvanize the Republican base against Romney. Mitt has been cruising along without taking any hits until now. Starting Wednesday it is a whole new game, though.

      Let’s see if Romney’s a bleeder when he’s cut…

      • usedtobelib

        The religious right and what you call the base doesn’t want Mitt.

        The suburban conservative voter, like me, prefers someone with a lot of business experience. I’d like to believe that the market will respond to his Presidency, convinced he won’t go after a legislative agenda that will stifle growth. I worked for almost 40 years at a job that didn’t pay that much so I struggled to take advantage of how much I was allowed to put into my 403b and doing so meant sacrificing a big part of my pay check for my retirement. Now, those funds have taken a huge hit. Like almost everyone else, the financial health of this country means a lot to me personally.

        I don’t trust a Gingrich with anything nor could he win the general because he simply can’t control himself. Even if he beat Obama upside the head on points in a series of debates, the American public would never be comfortable with him in the Oval Office. They’d say, “I can’t live with that guy for four years.” (He’s a clinical psychologist’s dream, however.)

        Santorum? Never run anything in his life. While I think he’s a good person, he’s often oft-putting with what comes off as sanctimony, and childish tendency to pout. Can’t win the general.

        Perry? Cant win the general. Fair or not, the country is still too mindful of another Texas governor whose problem being iinarticulate made him the target of ridicule. Perry’s early forays only served to confirm their fears, fair or not. Hasn’t caught on even with members of his own party. If there is even a slight improvement in the unemployment numbers by the time the general comes around, people will give Obama a hopeful second look, and the only person they’d be comfortable with in removing a President is one they consider his intellectual equal. Perry is not that guy, fair or not. He is not going to be viewed by a nation who doesn’t know him well as bright, fair or not.

        Huntsman? (Mr. Look at Me–I am simply more intelligent, more experienced, more handsome, more everything than anyone–oh, and did I tell you that I speak other languages like several dialects of Chinese? How can you voters even begin to contemplate voting for these others? And, did I tell you that what Iowans think is unimportant?) Others on this blog have used the term “creepy.” Yep.

        Paul–not even going to go there.

        Bachmann–she’s out. Evidently Ms. Bachmann turned off anyone who ever got close to her or had to work with her and she refused to actually meet too many voters.

        I wanted Mitch Daniels to get in the race so that I could have a good look at him and was disappointed when he declined. A guy’s got to want it, however, and he didn’t. Good for him that he didn’t allow someone to push him into it (I suspect this happened to Perry but even if it did, he hasn’t made the impression he needed to make on his own.)

        So, we have Rush and we Levin and we have the “Mormons-are-not-Christian” crowd all taking swings at the “front-runner” and by the time he or someone else crosses the finish line, they might be so battered and bruised they can’t get up out of their corner for the final championship round.

        There are no other candidates who are in it. Get over it.

  • usedtobelib

    Dissed Iowa voters (and we’d like to win Iowa in the general, right?)

    Yes, he is creepy, and you simply can’t remove that visceral reaction that people have to him.

  • trickamsterdam

    Agree w/ the author of this thread, that they don’t want Romney. Ironically, we’re all going to likely now get him.. And why?

    Because of Iowa/Iowans.

    I’m sorry, it makes logical sense Romney should be in the top three. He’s the establishment candidate. But for Paul and Santorum to finish in the top three in a field that includes Perry and Newt means something isn’t working right.

    It’s almost like Roulette…they just happened to reach voting day when Santorum was peaking. You almost think if it went on another three weeks and Santorum was vetted, it’d end up being Huntsman!

    And the Paul protest vote…I’m sorry, this is serious business. If the Iowans want to do protest votes, fine. They can do them.. They just can’t be first anymore. It means too much to the rest of us.

    I’m serious. Part of this website is being grassroots. Let’s be grass roots! Let’s seriously do this thing. Try to get them stripped of it (1st in the nation status).

    At least put some fear in them that Paul and Santorum in the top three is unacceptable and it will change if they don’t change.

    We can use the thread to consolidate and rally support for the idea…

    I’d do it myself, but I can’t write diaries yet. But somebody who can has to be as P.O.’d as me at what the Iowans did tonight! They turned this into a joke, and I really feel, they did it on a whim (Santorum happened to be peaking).

    Somebody out there write this thing. Then let’s recommend it! Then let’s teach Iowa a lesson or two…

    LET’S DO IT!

    • Adjoran

      New Hampshire has a state law requiring their primary be set first. Iowa doesn’t, but is one needed? They don’t award delegates, so they can’t be penalized that way. If you move others up, they will just move ahead.

      Before long the Iowa Caucus for the next cycle will be two weeks after the Inauguration!

      • jakeofalltrades

        just like with ebola?

        • trickamsterdam

          “Aliens” quote, Sigourney Weaver, on how to take out the Alien hive. Now an internet meme.

      • trickamsterdam

        This is the article. I originally read in on RCP:

        http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/Iowa-caucuses-Paul-polls/2011/12/20/id/421606

        But…maybe I was just blowing off steam.. Really hated that result. I do want to at least threaten them w/ the loss of it unless they can take things more seriously than this…but likely anyone who was as passionate will be caught up in NH, SC, on and on…Iowa just forgotten.

        Not only that, but since Romney ended up winning by eight votes Iowa can say “we’re mainstream” since he will likely be the winner.,

        Thanks for responding and the technical info about the delegates. I was unaware. I’m just going to try to forget about “The Children of the Corn” and move on.

    • lizzie

      seriously over-represented relative to the rest of America, and within the GOP.

      I have watched America become more divided over abortion for 35+ years. I saw the New York Dems make “protecting women’s reproductive rights” the #1 issue in 2010 when Medicaid is bankrupting NYS. Not a peep about THAT!

      I respect everyone’s beliefs, but, really, we now have $15 yrillion in federal debt, AND an unsustainable for twenty years trade deficit, and allowed private equity sharks to de-industrialize America. Abortion should NOT be the issue that decides who the GOP nominates for the Presidency.

      That is why I think the GOP Iowa caucus misrepresents the GOP.

      Just like the enviro-crazies in Vermont and Massachusetts distort the Democratic Party. (I got smackdowned in a village “greening” meeting for recommending homeowners could plant long-lived conifers and deciduous trees. Why? I was lectured that those trees will die in 100 years and release CO2. My realization that they ARE enviro-NIMBY crazies. I planted two white oaks and a Norway Spruce anyway – needed the afternoon shade:) )

      Mitch Daniels is correct about priorities – America really is on the edge of finacial disaster that will result in ever-higher taxes and draconian estate txes – exactly what the UK had to do when WW2 bankrupted them.

      • trickamsterdam

        In fact, the two that had the most problems w/ that, Romney and Paul, finished in the top three.

        Interesting side note (on the topic) of how bad a campaign Huntsman is running, though…I read a poll where a majority of Rs think he’s pro-choice (even though he’s always been pro-life).

        Incredible that he could screw up his message on something that basic…worst campaign I may have ever seen, in a year of worst things I’ve seen.

      • BA Cyclone

        I saw a poll maybe 9 months ago now that compared “issues voters” at large in Iowa to national GOP voting.

        Iowa’s “social conservatives” as a % of the Iowa GOP mirrored the national average for GOP voters.

        That was pretty much down-the-line for lots of issues. It’s media hype and spin that makes analysts and laypeople think the values here are out of line with anywhere else. Yes, Iowa GOPers are a lot different than NY or NJ or CA GOPers, but for the vast majority of GOP states we are generally….average. :D

    • usedtobelib

      “But for Paul and Santorum to finish in the top three in a field that includes Perry and Newt means something isn?t working right.”

      It’s not that I think Iowa should have “the right” to always begin the winnowing process–I don’t– but what makes you think that if Perry and Newt couldn’t do it in Iowa, a small state where one doesn’t have to have money to win (Santorum is proof of this), that they don’t deserve the results they got?

      • trickamsterdam

        It means too much to the rest of us.

        As for Santorum, I know him.. I was raised in PA. He was never vetted during this entire process. Iowans should know him, after him spending a year there…but obviously their judgment is useless.

        More likely, Iowans are self-important creeps, who thought Newt and Perry were “big shots”. Santorum on the other hand, was the groveling, drooling fool they desired…probably because he reminded them of themselves (i.e., buffoons). So that’s why I Newt and Perry didn’t deserve their results.

        Santorum is about to vetted by the MSM and by the Romney Machine. When you see how insane and incompetent he truly is, you’ll realize how foolish Iowans were that they couldn’t learn it in a year. It’s only going to take about two to four weeks to explain it to the rest of the country.

        But as I said in a later post, to adjoran, I’m over Iowa. What’s done is done. Let the Children of the Corn be children (w/ their protest votes and petty favorites). But if possible, they should be stripped of first in the nation status. Period.

        • trickamsterdam

          We need a first in the nation state to be above that kind of petty ego tripping (IMO).

          • gekster

            Addendum to my last post to usedtobelib:
            trickamsterdam Wednesday, January 4th at 3:15PM EST (link)
            When I said Iowans liked Santorum because he was “groveling, drooling” what I meant was when people described how “he’d talk anywhere even people’s living rooms”. Iowans were flattered by that, and that mattered more to them than his qualifications.
            We need a first in the nation state to be above that kind of petty ego tripping (IMO).

            How many comments did you push off by putting your almost full comment in the title box.

            Be a little considerate, will ya. :)

          • trickamsterdam

            could be unlimited…I just thought I’d use it (to get my point across, in case someone didn’t read the whole post).

            But I see what you mean now by “push it off”. To be honest, the layout of this website is different than any I’ve seen…

            I like the posters and the people running it (their posts), but it’s just bizarre…

            But, be assured, now, that I know it will affect other posters, I’ll do it in the normal way (how I did it originally actually). Thanks for the heads up, btw. People might have thought I’d known, and just didn’t care.

          • pttx333

            sea legs when we’re new around here. gek was simply letting you know a better way, that’s all!

  • usedtobelib

    “Newt?s entire life has been a series of dramatic policy initiatives, bombastic claims about his own intelligence, infidelity to his wives, and a short-fused temper that takes everything personally. He never changes his mind (right); instead, he labels his policy reversals as correcting his ?mistakes.? And yet Horowitz is still pushing him!”

    The guy is just too uncontrolled. I don’t believe he’d have any more control over his mouth with heads of state than he does any other time. I do think he suffers from megalomania.

  • penhall99

    Does anyone new have a chance to jump in? Or are we stuck with this crappy bunch?

  • BA Cyclone

    With the prospects of electing a conservative president becoming dimmer by the day, we really need to divert some of our attention to the congressional races.

    Rick Perry’s finish last night still stings, even though at least he was a strong 2nd in my precinct.

    I’ve been wondering a lot of the morning what’s next for me and activism.

    I’m officially a precinct committeeman now, and I’ll be going through our convention process this spring. Obviously, I’ll be active in the county Republican central committee.

    But for candidates? Well, Steve King is now running to be my Congressman in 2012 thanks to redistricting, and he’s in a (supposedly) healthy fight with the wife of our ex-Governor (who is now Ag Sec for Obama). So that could be something worthwhile for me to do this summer, go work for him.

    Thanks for the encouragement!

  • jjnco73

    or leave the Republican Party. We can call it a political divorce! We are going to lose anyways, let?s just make our objection known now. A second place in the general election will better our chances in 2016 with a conservative candidate. The key is we already have the groundwork in place and we have the grassroots. It’s time to make our objections known now!

    • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

      We are banning people for this kind of talk.

    • JSobieski

      How can that same candidate get a majority of the population at large?

      Splitting off nevers pays off unless you want politicians who lose.

      Politicians who lose is what gave us Obama and D super-majorities in 2008.